Welcome to DMCTalk.org: an open forum dedicated to the discussion and debate about our beloved sports car the DeLorean, its maker, and anything interesting in-between. Registration is free, and by doing so you get to post and participate in the discussion and view any attachments. Since this is an open forum, not all views expressed by its participants are shared by the owners and moderators of the forum. Enjoy the forum everyone! If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. Click here to register. AFTER REGISTERING YOUR NEW ACCOUNT, PLEASE EMAIL "newmember@dmctalk.org" TO HAVE YOUR ACCOUNT ACTIVATED. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

That looks great!
That's about where I'm going with mine. I'm dropping the front 1.5", and wasn't even bothering with the rear. The rear might look a tad better maybe a half an inch lower, but it doesn't need to go down but very little. I haven't decided that such a small drop would be worth the trouble - yet. I may change my mind once I set it down with the new front springs and have a look. I'm just trying to get the stance right, not going to slam it.

In that case (lower in front, no change in rear) plan to re-aim all 4 headlights, too.

In that case (lower in front, no change in rear) plan to re-aim all 4 headlights, too.

Good point. Easy enough. I drove a 71 Nova street/strip car (way more strip than street) as a daily driver for at least a decade. The front sub frame on that car was about 4 inches off the ground. I've set up Mopars, Fords and others for the 1/4, so I'm pretty familiar with suspension mods and what to expect. And no, I'm not making any attempt to set this up to drag. That would be just about the dumbest thing I could think of to attempt with a DeLorean. It's a collector car that turns heads and gets an amazing amount of attention. I just want it to look good and cruise reliably.

That looks great!
That's about where I'm going with mine. I'm dropping the front 1.5", and wasn't even bothering with the rear. The rear might look a tad better maybe a half an inch lower, but it doesn't need to go down but very little. I haven't decided that such a small drop would be worth the trouble - yet. I may change my mind once I set it down with the new front springs and have a look. I'm just trying to get the stance right, not going to slam it.

Thanks. Good luck with the work. I think our cars are different than other cars in terms of "lowering".
Because our cars left the factory cartoonishly nose high (and the reason wasn't documented or disclosed), lowering means returning the car to its design height. I noticed that the stock front springs made for an undesirable positive camber, and with no adjustment afforded, that told me that was not intended.

Thanks. Good luck with the work. I think our cars are different than other cars in terms of "lowering".
Because our cars left the factory cartoonishly nose high (and the reason wasn't documented or disclosed), lowering means returning the car to its design height. I noticed that the stock front springs made for an undesirable positive camber, and with no adjustment afforded, that told me that was not intended.

I always thought that the front end was raised in order to conform to bumper height laws in America. The idea was to have all bumpers at roughly the same height. Side note- The car looks so much better lowered in front. I would like to put mine somewhere between freakishly high (how it came) and where it was designed to be (seems too low to me).

I always thought that the front end was raised in order to conform to bumper height laws in America. The idea was to have all bumpers at roughly the same height. Side note- The car looks so much better lowered in front. I would like to put mine somewhere between freakishly high (how it came) and where it was designed to be (seems too low to me).

Yeah, I chose that height because here in Florida, we have deep rain gutters and inclined entrance ramps / driveways to contend with. My previous C5 Corvette scraped the lower (rubber) air dam every time, even when approaching the ramps at an angle. It was only the rubber portion and there were integrated metal skids to try and protect the painted fascia above it, but hearing that scraping sound was unnerving, especially when you hit the skids.

I wanted to avoid that with this car that I intended to drive. Plus, I was aiming for an even gap around the wheel arc.

Yeah, I chose that height because here in Florida, we have deep rain gutters and inclined entrance ramps / driveways to contend with. My previous C5 Corvette scraped the lower (rubber) air dam every time, even when approaching the ramps at an angle. It was only the rubber portion and there were integrated metal skids to try and protect the painted fascia above it, but hearing that scraping sound was unnerving, especially when you hit the skids.

I wanted to avoid that with this car that I intended to drive. Plus, I was aiming for an even gap around the wheel arc.

I would like to copy your look (with your permission).
Can you give me your specs?

I would like to copy your look (with your permission).
Can you give me your specs?

Sure. I'll verify measurements etc. and send you a PM. ( It might be a couple days.)

Originally Posted by dn010

I too have read they needed to change the height due to US regulations.

Yeah, I read that discussion as well, but there was some dispute too. Then a theory about adjusting to get the cars onto the transporters. If anyone has a source that confirms the reason, that would be most helpful.

Sure. I'll verify measurements etc. and send you a PM. ( It might be a couple days.)

Yeah, I read that discussion as well, but there was some dispute too. Then a theory about adjusting to get the cars onto the transporters. If anyone has a source that confirms the reason, that would be most helpful.

This debate over the height and if it was changed and why has been going on for many years. I agree the "look" of the tires in the wheel wells makes it appear that the stance is too high. To date no one has produced any solid documentation to substantiate any "change". There has been a lot of speculation and good logic for it but nothing you can point to and say what was done and why. If a change was made it had to have occurred very early on during the production, probably before. From very early after the first deliveries people have been lowering the height. "Back in the Day" they would swap the springs front-to-back, and cut a turn out of the rear springs to put in the front. Very crude but cheap and you didn't have to buy any parts, besides no one was offering any parts to lower the cars back then even if you wanted to buy them. Because the toe is set for the "correct" ride height and the ride height has no mention of ever being changed it appears that the height is what was designed, at least once production got going. Same for the rear, if you lower the rear you MUST adjust the camber and to do that you either cut and weld the lower links or make them adjustable. Maybe one day James Espey or Steven Wynn will find documentation that can tell us more about this.